One reason for the lower smash factor could be contributed to a softer carbon steel.

lofts are weaker in the mp-32 though? and probably because they're lighter

Hogan apex 11 cameo irons were the first irons I used in 1983. My Father bought them for me, thinking that they would be easier to hit than his blades, which were basically thin Scottish blades, with a head the size of a soup spoon, circa 1930s. The feedback was unreal and if you didn't hit them on the sweetspot, it felt like an electric shock running through your arms. Incidentally the apex 11s were the last irons that Mr Hogan used. I sure miss those Baby Blades.

Neil Cavendish yeah mx32s def More forgiving, better for the scorecard and that’s all that matters!

Excellent choice, I go back to the mx25's when my chunkies get annoying. That era MX seems magically forgiving for what they were.

At 60 yrs old with a swing speed that only gets me 200 yrd drives, I bought a set of graphite shafted , flex face distance irons , they're two clubs longer , but they feel like plastic compared to my blades and I miss the joy of a pureed shot.

By the time the club makes contact with the grass the ball should be long gone and won’t effect distance.

helopuro thanks mate, will do!

I play some 1970's Ben Hogan radials shoot high 70's , low 80's , $20.00 at Goodwill

Yes please!!

I live in Botswana - what are they? :)

Ben Hogan equaliser wedges (amazing.) 8/9/Pw = MC 501’s 6/7 iron = IC 601 3+5 hybrids. And yes they are expensive, but it’s my main hobby and they make me happy every time I look at them. So I saved up and bought one iron every second month for a year until I had the set I wanted 😂

Fergus Reeve bit embarrassing that I’m a coach and never thought of using a blade at the range for my better students as a training aid, like that idea. Thanks mate 💪

I’m not a better player either lol. But playing with a blade improved my golf almost immediately. Certainly within a month my iron play had a noticeable improvement in accuracy and consistently- even if I lost a bit of distance because I was forced to have a more controlled swing and not throw the kitchen sink at it. So I’m now a full club shorter than I was before (eg I use an 8i for 150yards instead of my 9) but I can hit those numbers time after time- which is what matters the most. Plus if you ever get the chance, please do try the Miura mc501’s. They are a thing of beauty and worth every single penny IMO. And I’m not s great golfer and I’m sure as hell not rich lol.

clevited yeah smash factor might be a bit out, as gc2 can’t measure club speed but kinda gives a good guess. Hopefully we will have GC quads soon! Thanks mate.

If you take the mp18s out for a full round of golf and the take the mp32s out ...you will find a better score with the mp32s...Go on (Have a go)..Then post on youtube..Or would you be too embarrassed....I think a lot of golfers would like to see the result..Thanks David

Completely agree brother. I was a high handicapper that used blades ever since I started playing. If you are a high handicap player don't be discouraged by blades!

inocrrect hello pal, actually the other way round mate, that’s smash factor not efficiency, as gc2 can only measure ball speed it estimates the Clubhead speed and then works out a fake smash factor. The smash factor was higher because the mp18 has higher ball speed. Thanks.

@@SASGolf The shaft was 30g lighter in the 18, that's where the balk speed difference came from. There is no way a blade is 10% more efficient than another blade. It not like the 32 is from 1960!

+Mitch McKurtis yeah Gc2 can’t work out Clubhead speed, just ball speed, so Calculates smash on ball speed alone and because I hit harder than normal, that’s what it comes out with.

Nick Millar im hesitant on buying the ft worth irons. Mainly because i cant swing them before i buy em. But they do look amazing and cant complain with the price

I use Ap1 (off 15) but bought a set of |MP32's recently and love the feel of them- have actually been scoring well with them but I stay in Scotland and my track particularly windy so will only ever use them on good dry conditions- need the AP1 when I need the extra distance and forgiveness

I use United blades and could never go back to cavitys

Excellent video. I play off 13 and have the MP18 MBs (4i-PW). I love them. Interestingly they carry around 10 yards further than my previous MP15s. I have better dispersion but also an x-stiff shaft. Also what’s interesting is my 6 iron carries about the same as yours. But my driving distance is still about 70 yards behind you! I’m probably off 13 because I’m so inconsistent. When you button them out of the middle there’s no better feeling. I find if I hit them a bit toe’y I’ll lose around 10 yards but they’re a lot more forgiving than people think! I just wish they did them in chrome!

Mizuno MP5's ....wouldn't change them for anything else!

I've been playing blades since I was 12. Haven't know anything else. Tried CBs, but they look like shovels to my eye. As they say, Horses for courses.

Ian rushes Left foot haha looking back at the footage whilst editing I thought that comment might of got pulled up 😅

Seriously I agree with you he's the reason I wanted to play golf . Best scenes I have witnessed watching sport was the scenes with his kids after the masters. A tiger in contention again benefits everybody in the game. Great content as usual pal

no more words of truth have even been spoken. Tiger is great, but people like Jones, Hogan, Nicklaus, Sneed and Nelson were far better. Equipment then and now is the main difference. If Tech was better, these 5 would have won way more. The question now, it if Tiger played in the previous era, how would he stack up? Sure it is a great player, but the greatest of all time, NOT A CHANCE.....

Lol you guys sound like old “get off my lawn” guys. No one has ever dominated the game like tiger. His peak is something that has never been seen. That’s why he’s considered the greatest. Tech would not have helped those other guys because the field all had the same - it was level competition.

I'll just put this here. 1. Including this years Masters, Tiger has only 1 come from behind victory in a Major and Jack had 8 on the final day. 2. Jack has 19 runner-ups in Majors while Tiger only has 6. Jack has 48 3rd place Major finishes vs Tiger having 24. 3. Jack has 18 Major victories and Tiger has 15. **This is all FACT, not opinion, if you FEEL Tiger is the greatest of all time, that is fine, but the FACTS say something different** ON TECH. Jack regularly hit drives with Balatas and Persimmon Woods over 320yds. To say this was incredible is an understatement. That was far outside the norm for his day. If he would have had access to better balls and clubs, there is no telling what would happen. AND, if tech didn't matter, then why do R&D departments for all the major makers spend millions every year designing new products (yes, some are money grabs) but you can't tell me that the consistency and characteristics of the balls aren't far superior today than in the 60s and 70s. On clubs, there was no mention of CGI, MOI, weight injection and playing with computers to design club faces for maximum distance and control in the 60s and 70s. It is just a fact that today's game is different and mainly because of advances in club design, materials and ball manufacturing. It is just something that can't be argued on a scientific level. This means the players from the 60s and 70s had to be more precise and do more with their ball to make shots happen whereas today's players can "get away" with hitting off center shots. **WATCH THIS AS EVIDENCE** kzfaq.info/get/bejne/r7qffqyBzJy-gX0.html I wont even go into course conditions between the eras. Ask any older tour player and they will tell you today's courses are in much, much better shape than what they played on a regular basis. This does make a difference as well. Courses have had to change layouts and length due to technology changes in equipment. Ask ANY course designer or superintendent and they will tell you the same thing. I'm not saying that Tiger wouldn't have been a top player in the 60s and 70s, but as of now, he doesn't posses the record to justify him having the label the greatest of all time. I would call him the 2nd greatest of all time. When he gets to Jacks Major record, then i will change my mind.

Jeff Hollon you obviously didn’t read what I said so I’m not gonna read that. I already know all the stats

@@Brandon-yf3tz thought so, don't let facts get in the way of the truth. i agree on the level playing field, but that still doesn't mean Tiger is the greatest, the record is there. at its base element, 18 is greater than 15 when i went to school.